All News

No One Way.

When we get five different answers from our Panel as to what they would bid after a rather straightforward start to an auction, then we have a problem! So, let’s have a look.

 

2 shows 5 spades and 4+ of a minor, less than an opening hand. We are playing Teams.

Let’s “go up the line”.

Andy Braithwaite “Double: and rebid 3- should show about this hand when I did not bid 3 in the first place.”

Anthony Ker “Double: A smidge too strong for an overcall of 3, which partner might drop holding a random 8 points and a heart shortage. 2NT is right on strength but I have too many hearts and not enough spades. If partner responds 2NT Lebensohl, I will bid 3 and we can stop. If she bids 3 of minor, I will respond 3 (forcing) and we will head towards game.” 

Well, it’s a plan. Moving up:

Peter Newell “2NT: Shows 15-18 even in balancing position otherwise it is too hard with this range.  The choices seem to be a somewhat flawed 2NT, or a heavy 3H, or double.  I'm with 2NT as it is close on values (I am a bit good playing strength wise for 2NT but not prepared to bid 3NT), ensures NT contracts are played from my side, is a balanced hand, and I can show a 5 card heart suit if partner bids 3 Puppet Stayman.

3 is possible, but is quite strong for a balancing 3. Partner will pass on hands you can make game, and the balanced nature of the hand make 3NT seem appealing.  Double intending to bid 3 at least gets the strength across but partner may bid 2NT over Double if you play Lebensohl or 2NT pick a minor which will wrong side potential NT contracts. So I'll bid 2NT, but do not like it much.”   

Stephen Blackstock “3: There is no attractive option at this point. For game to be worthwhile, partner will have to contribute and I will hear from him. Bidding NT would be premature, as outside the strong hearts any tricks I may have are slow, far from ideal given my fragile stoppers and the possibility that West may quickly establish one of his suits. I also want North to value the Q or length, and to know that shortage is a bad sign. I am not concerned about missing game as 3 shows a hand of quality: this is not a balancing situation. E/W have not found a fit. A weaker South would risk finding East itching to hear an imprudent action from his opponents.

I expect some will want to double and then bid hearts. To me this is not only a misdescription, it is also an over- bid. The offensive value of this hand is lower than its count. Of course, occasionally a double may collect a big penalty when E/W have nowhere to go, but as I have a sound alternative, I prefer to pursue our own prospects rather than distort to chase the butterflies. 

 

Thank you, Director, for the 6^th heart. Without that all the options would be very flawed!”

 

Peter and Stephen seem to have differing views of the strength of 3. If it could be balancing, then we seem rather too strong. While we are strong, we have only one ace, a negative factor especially in heart play.

 

Leon Meier “3: shouldn't be too many hands partner passes 3 where we make game and I don't think partner has a trap pass.

I agree if the making game is 4 but would partner move in any direction with the actual North hand below?

 

Bruce Anderson “3: I have quite a good hand but unless partner has the values to raise, we will not make game. The hand is not strong enough to double and then bid my suit. Even if West has a very weak suit and partner has four strong spades, and something outside, a big penalty will only be possible if E/W do not have a better fit in a minor as East has length in hearts. All of that is anti- percentage, so 3 it is.”

 

Then we have the game bidders:

Nigel Kearney “3NT: is my best guess. These hands are tough. For me it is a little too strong for 3 or 2NT in fourth seat. Double and then hearts will not help partner determine which is the correct game and may not get us there from the right side. Sometimes 4 will make when 3NT does not, but I think the reverse is more likely.”

 

Wayne Burrows “4: Looks like a middle of the road 4 bid.”

This bid looks at the top end as far as our Panel is concerned. One factor we might take into account is the lack of a spade raise from East. This may mean they do not have spade length and that our partner does. That and our lack of aces tends to suggest that if we want to be aggressive then maybe we should try either 2 or 3NT. It was certainly a good idea at the table:

 

Without the J appearing in dummy, we would not be making any game, certainly not 4. In 3NT, with a certain spade hold even after a club lead from West, declarer needs one of the red suits to behave. 5 diamond and 3 heart tricks should be enough if South is given a trick in one of the black suits. Would North raise 2NT to game? On the basis that game might make opposite a strong no trump, they probably would. I am less sure after a 3 call from South.

Meanwhile, 4 would stand no chance unless there was a favourable trump break. After a club lead or indeed any lead, even 9 tricks in hearts is a big ask (only A at trick 1 gives South a chance of 9).

So, a tough decision as reflected by the range of answers. Maybe one question to ask your partner is how weak a 3 bid could be here. If the answer is maybe just balancing, then 2NT or double do have merit.

Richard Solomon

We are sad to have to report the passing of Dargaville Club President, James Nyssen. We received this tribute from Auckland-Northland Regional Committee member, Jane Stearns.

  
   James flanked by Dargaville stalwarts Peter Ball and Pam Rope

“James was admired for his friendliness at the table and his obvious enjoyment of the game.  He was welcoming in his role as President and joined in our Regional online discussions.  He was truly an example of how bridge can be such an all- encompassing sport where everyone has a place and a welcome from a club.  It is a huge loss for the Dargaville club and its members.  He will certainly be missed at our Northland events.”

 

Go Back View All News Items